Ive noticed that alot of decks are using a large amount of Monsters. Most decks are using 22 - 24 monsters in a deck. The Question i ask is Why?
Ive always hated using more than 19 monsters in a deck because anymore than that and then you hardly draw your Spells and Traps and your hand just fills up with useless Monters.
So is there an advantage in running a high amount of monsters in a deck?
PLMK as i dont think its a good idea.

Thanks alot people.

Also if this thread had already been discussed before then give me a link and then i can close this thread. Thanks

In my current deck I run 21 monsters.. this is the first time in over almost two years time that I run so many monsters...

I usually stop at 18/19.
but in some decks, like mine atm, you need monsters in order to filter your deck.
with the Tomatoes you can get Reapers and Sangan etc.
so the it doesn't matter that you play over 20 monsters..

spell thinners and draw cards are lower than they used to be. People are resorting to other methods of getting through their decks. Dekoichi, Magical Merchants, basic Attribute searchers, ect.

Those that don't focus on these monsters are more likely to have things like Spirit Reapers or high attackers that can physically stall out attacks until the proper s/t effects or win combos are drawn into.

That's all I can see, from basic lists and stuff.

I've wondered why the monsters counts as so high myself. It may have something to do with trying to make 3x Sorcerers consistent, but that's just a guess.

In recent decks I've built, I've found that monsters don't come when I need them (instead I'm topdecking Mirror Force when Royal Decree is out, or something). I've found that increasing my monster count helps to overcome this.

The high monster count is seen heavily in Chaos Return decks and variants....This is obviously due to two factors:

#1 - If a chain of monsters leave the deck (example: NoC hitting Dekoichi or the use of Magical Merchant's effect), it doesn't leave the deck in a summoning shortage where you, the player of the deck draw mostly Spell & Traps when you desire to draw monsters.

#2 - If there is a counter to the deck strategy such as Royal Decree to Return from the Different Dimension, the high monster count provides as backup if at any time you start to lose momentum and/or control of the field through Zaborg, Jinzo, & Chaos Sorceror.

With how the decks are now, unless you can learn how to keep your momentum when game breaking monsters hit the field, victory will slip out of your hands....

Monsters are the main focus of the game. At first, people were using more Magics and Traps simply because the effect of monsters just wasn't that good. Now, You generally need more monsters because of alot of the removal cards out there.

I had been stuck in the mindset of running 16-18 monsters in a deck for quite some time. But as the last few formats have come and gone, our draw power has deminished quite a bit. Like others were saying, our primary draw cards used to be Spells, while now we rely on Spells and Monsters for our primary thinning methods. I myself haven't gone as high as the 20-24 monsters that some people run, I like to stay in the 18-20 range, having more monsters than that scares me, it means lots of hands full of orange.

If anyone recalls when most duelists ran 16-18 monsters we also had Pot of Greed, Graceful, 3X's Scapegoats, and 3X's Metamorphosis. Not only were we able to dig deeper for monster options but Scapegoats would lock up the field maintaining board presence as Metamorphosis itself would also generally became a Thousand Eyes Restrict. I feel this rising count in monsters is a reflection of duelists making an effort to fill these gaps. Increasing the amount of monsters maindecked equals field presence. Plain and simple.

I still remember when running around 15 monsters was optimal. I think the previous poster had alot of good points so yeah.

lol, that's true. When I first started coming to Realms, it was like a 16 monster max that was recommended for decks. Anything more meant you couldn't get to your powerful spells quick enough. Now, without enough monsters, you would get stuck drawing less game-changing effects while desperately hoping to get a monster to defend yourself with.

Is it any wonder Dekoichi has become as synonymous with major decks, as Spirit Reaper?

I don't know about anyone else, but I go for 20 max as far as monsters go, I learned the hard way if your not drawing any good magic cards that can protect you then your screwed.......plus there are a few magic cards that can win a match up easily like Destiny Board for example but you'll have to stall for a few turns though

Mainly because of netdecking, I say. But I guess that's the main reason. If the single card, Pot Greed, weren't banned, then definitely the monster count would decrease, but maybe by only one or two monster cards. We would not have to rely on flipers that can allow us to draw more cards (Dekoichi, Skelengel, etc), and we also would not have to rely on Pot of Avarice as much for draw power, which is another card that is contributing to the high monster count seen today. We want to have a better guarantee of activating Pot of Avarice earlier in the game, so 19+ monsters helps in that regard.

i run about 15 monster or less sometimes in my deck =).....i think maybe its because i run a uria deck...lol